Posted by Anthony on March 14, 2009
I am currently promoting my Birth Pangs series and thought it would be a good idea to point to a few places where I have argued that turning the tide in America today means changing the way we witness. In particular, using narrative, whether visually or in text.
America is increasingly a mission field in its own right. Just as missionaries have to learn the language of the natives before they can present the Gospel effectively, so too do we need to do the same in America. This does not mean (per some trends in apologetics today) adopting the ‘language’ and methodologies wholesale. For example, some aspects of post-modernism provide legitimate insights into the nature of reality. However, much of post-modernism needs to be rejected as rubbish. Nonetheless, if we want to communicate with a Pomo person, we have to be able to speak their language, presenting truth in their context, without necessarily accepting as truth that context.
Fiction and narrative in general are effective measures for presenting ideas that would otherwise be incomprehensible to someone or, if presented explicitly, would be rejected. Unfortunately, the use of narrative as means to transmit ideas is left in large part to secularists and nonChristians. In my view, this needs to change, if only because it is increasingly becoming the only way to present the Gospel or Christian ideas to people in a way that they won’t reject at the start.
To read more about my views you can browse this blog, beginning with these links:
Literary apologetics the key to turning the Tide.
Text of a Presentation I gave on the need for apologetics in arts and literature.
Posted by Anthony on February 10, 2009
Hat tip to Charles for pointing this article out to me.
Recently ChristianityToday had an excellent article on the use of science fiction to communicate a distinctly secular and atheistic world view. If you are a Christian that cares for the state of the Church today and our modern challenge, you should read the article.
The article correctly says:
… viewers don’t leave movies such as Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Hancock, X-Men, and Contact—or television programs such as The X-Files or Heroes—scratching their heads in confusion. We are intrigued, but not surprised. Why? Because stories of advanced extraterrestrials, ancient human-alien contact, superior intelligences roaming the universe, and emerging super-races have grown familiar through repeated exposure. Thanks to the longstanding efforts of a wide range of artists, popular writers, and even scientists, we immediately recognize intelligent aliens and advanced humans. We now see space and the future as sources of hope.
One of the things that I’ve noted (see this blog entry on Heroes and Philip Pullman) is that the modern method is to denounce anything we might call supernatural as nonsense in one breath, and in the other breath re-issue the same phenomena but provide a naturalistic explanation for it. Heroes is a great case in point, as most of the ‘heroes’ have powers that, if we ever met them in real life, we’d instantly conclude were supernatural. But Heroes prepares the way for 2 Thess. 2:9-10 in that it provides a ‘plausible’ explanation for how even the miraculous is merely natural. (In my discussions with atheists, no evidence for natural explanations is necessary- plausibility is sufficient. See, for eg., abiogenesis, and Dawkins hemming and hawing at the end of Ben Stein’s Expelled).
Another case in point is Carl Sagan’s Contact, where scientists are able to scientifically detect intelligent design. We are told today that this is impossible; the implications involved in conceding even the mere possibility of reliably detecting design are too frightening to be allowed by our ‘methodological’ naturalists. So, Contact would not have been written today, but even so it served to show how ‘advanced’ information is no evidence at all for God, and can be- and should be- interpreted in natural terms. With this method in mind, it is no wonder that atheists conclude there is no God. They are merely ahead of the pop culture trend, prepared to interpret all facts in naturalistic terms and then smug in their conclusion that no facts exist to support supernaturalism.
So how does one combat this? Read the rest of the entry… »
Posted by Anthony on December 17, 2008
I noticed that I was getting some traffic related to this question that is linked to my recent post comparing and contrasting Santa Claus with Jesus, arguing that in spite of atheistic pot shots about the difference between belief in Santa and belief in Jesus is that kids grow out of belief in Santa, the fact is that there is historical evidence for Santa- and even more evidence for Jesus.
But these searchers want to know if Christians should promote the belief in the commercialized myth of Santa.
Personally, I would answer as ‘No. No, you should not.’ The reasons are varied. For one thing, I think that the general rule is that parents ought to tell their children the truth about reality. Believe it or not, but I have actually encountered atheists- in real life and online- who indicated that finding out that ‘Santa isn’t real’ undermined their certainty in the existence of God and in Jesus’ resurrection. You don’t have to believe it and you don’t have to agree with these atheists in the extension of their logic, but nontheless, there they are.
As indicated in the previous blog entry (linked above) I think that there is value, however, in pointing out that there was in fact a historical person behind the Santa story. I expect that this will have the opposite effect of what I just described, where young people will see that their parents tell the truth, but also that just because something is old doesn’t mean it isn’t true or valid. Though no one when pressed admits that they are dismissing something (ie, like the idea that Jesus even existed) merely because the data is old, in actual attitude that is precisely why they are dismissing it. Examples of this are a dime a dozen. By explaining that can distinguish between fact and fantasy from the historical record most of the time, one puts themselves in a position where they can lay important groundwork for trusting the New Testament accounts.
You might say that it seems a little ridiculous to be worried about such things when we’re just talking about something as innocent as Santa Claus but the facts are what they are. Read the rest of the entry… »
Posted by Anthony on March 15, 2008
Below is the text of the speech I gave recently at my event in Wisconsin. I don’t typically write out my presentations. I usually work off an outline and as it happened I ended up setting aside the text completely and working off of memory. The presentation that I actually came had the same general points but was presented a bit differently. Also, due to time constraints I skipped some points in the actual presentation that appear in the text. It seemed worthwhile to make this available for those who wanted the best of all worlds.
It is also useful as a stalling tactic while I continue to work on other projects. 
Because of the length of this presentation (9 pages in Word, single spaced), I have also made it available in PDF so that you can download and print it. It is important to note that this is only the first half of the presentation. The second half is not available in text. I may at some point make it available in audio.
Also, my graduation speech “The Fellowship of the King” came up during the Q+A section. You can find it here, in full text and Youtube: http://sntjohnny.com/front/the-fellowship-of-the-king-graduation-speech-2005/217.html
March 10th, 2008. Presentation by Anthony Horvath to the Philosophy Club at Concordia University Wisconsin. Copyright 2008, All Rights Reserved.
It is an honor and a pleasure to be here today. I have been asked to speak on apologetics through the arts, such as literature and music or in other words the promotion of Christianity through the fruits of the creative mind. In order to understand where I’m coming from it will be helpful to give a little bit of background.
I grew up going to a Lutheran grade school and high school and went to college- this college, in fact- with the intent to become a pastor. I enrolled in the pastoral ministry program and promptly became an atheist. Normally they want your pastors to believe in God so this was a real problem. A short time into my second semester I was a Christian again but under new terms. I really understood what I believed and why I believed it. I also realized that I didn’t want to be a pastor anymore but rather someone who would help people who had been in a situation like my own. I stayed in the pastoral ministry program because I was enjoyed theology and such, which probably wasn’t the best career move. It did allow me to finally get some teaching positions. I taught a year of 9th and 10th grade religion in Minnesota and then 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 12th grade religion in Rockford Illinois, where I also taught Biblical Greek and philosophy and Christian apologetics at a local Lutheran bible college.
I then moved to Wisconsin where I was the Director for Parish Ministries- sort of a glorified DCE position- for three years. In the meantime, in the midst of my professional church work career, I was engaging in debate with atheists, mormons, and the occasional jehovah witness on various online forums. I am now a stay at home dad, an author, a speaker, and still an apologist, but now apologetics is not what I do in my spare time but is my main endeavor.
Now, the interesting thing is that over the last 5 to 6 years my perspective on apologetics has changed. I already had a deep disappointment that the church and my Christian education had failed to equip me with even the basics of the evidences for Christianity but my focus was firmly on the nonChristian, usually the one positively hostile to Christianity. But I started to notice that most of the nonChristians I was interacting with had also grown up in the church. In many cases, their knowledge of Christianity was as bad as mine had been and in many cases much worse. Read the rest of the entry… »
Posted by Anthony on January 15, 2008
I posted a very quick blurb the other day about how I was going to start publishing some of my short stories on my blog. I didn’t elaborate much on it, but I used the word ‘metanarrative’ in the title. To my surprise, I received a fair amount of hits just from that brief mention. I have much to say about such issues in light of my interest in ‘literary apologetics’ but I was going to wait. I want people coming to this site in search of such themes to have some idea of where I’m coming from, so allow this post to be an introduction.
I have been debating Christianity for more than ten years. I entertained atheism for awhile while studying to be a pastor and after returning to Christianity became passionate about apologetics. I have encountered all sorts of objections to Christianity. It took some time for me to realize the full implications of postmodern attitudes towards Christianity. In particular, postmodern’s skepticism of any truth claim is often found right alongside modernistic demands for evidence.
As a case in point, consider this thread on my forum. The accusation is made that Christianity and all of religion are shown up by the scientific method and its fruits. Scientific evidence for the truthfulness of Christianity is the only kind of evidence allowed to be considered. Consider this post in particular from page two:
Arguing with religion is such an unfair battle. It is so easy to dispute or agree with physical evidence because it has a basis. But it is impossible for us to even make one argument against religion. If you feel religion can be tested then tell me what basis is used to test religion? I know I have asked this question already but I feel in reply 14 I proved sufficiently that religion cannot have basis (without physical evidence). If it does have a basis then you should be able to answer the question.
My biggest problem I have with Christianity and any other religion is that they do not provide a satisfying enough explanation. For how incredibly complex this world is, how incredibly complex humans and life is. How incredibly large and amazing our universe is. I feel the explanation to all of this must be just as incredible if not more so. I want an explanation that can explain and account for why dinosaurs lived, why our universe is so large and what purpose it serves, what lies outside of our universe. I want an explanation that is so consistent and true that everyone could easily agree with it because it leaves room for no doubt (the same way every truth we know does). For such a structured world, it only makes sense that the explanation holds as much structure as the world itself. The answers religions give are unfulfilling. [emphasis mine]
Here you see a clear juxtaposition between complaints about the metanarrative combined with accusations about the physical evidence. How can we be certain here that the physical evidence, as he puts it, is relevant at all? If this gentleman found the evidence he was looking for in religion but nonetheless found it ‘unfulfilling’ would that make any difference to him? Would he accept a religion supported by the ‘physical evidence’ but was nonetheless personally unsatisfying?
Look at the part I have bolded. Since science is by definition limited to the innards of our physical universe, just how is it that this gentlemen proposes to have ‘physical evidence’ for an answer purporting to account for the largeness of our universe, its purpose, or what is outside the universe? Ironically, he wants an explanation that science cannot offer by definition and then only insists on using science to get there. This is not rational, this is not logical, this is not reasonable. Nonetheless, this is essentially where many if not most skeptics are these days.
To answer my own question from above, no. No, I do not believe that if the ‘physical evidence’ was all in support of religion or Christianity in particular that people with such a mindset, if they found it nonetheless ‘unfulfilling,’ would accept Christianity. We have to wonder how much of the criticism of Christianity has to do with its metanarrative as opposed to its evidence, physical or otherwise. I have long suspected that for most it doesn’t matter at all.
Is it really the case that Christianity is as unfulfilling and as unsatisfying as many seem to think it is? I don’t think so at all. I certainly do not believe that evolution (which the gent referenced explicitly cites in this context) is satisfying in the slightest. I think, however, that we Christians have not adequately grasped the fact that what is being challenged is not the evidence but the adequacy of the Story. Now, I don’t blame us for it because it is rare to hear anyone admit that they don’t actually care about the evidence. Note how the person I’ve cited has modernistic expectations of evidence and science while seamlessly raising postmodernistic objections. It would be tempting and impulsive to leap into a discussion about evidence and the limits of science which ought to be self-evident to this person. Writ large, with skeptics across the board cloaking their objections to Christianity’s metanarrative in the guise of challenges of the evidence, it is natural that we’d want to respond to those challenges and not necessarily see what is for many (if not most, if not all) the real objections.
With themes such as this in mind I have taken to writing more stories. I don’t actually think that the skeptics really understand Christianity’s metanarrative, and this is in part because we have not spent time in fleshing this out for people- including ourselves. Having a grasp of the Grand Story will help reconcile for seekers many of the items in Christianity that don’t make sense, just as understanding the general plot of Hamlet will help make sense of certain scenes within it.
I assume of course, that these are honest and sincere seekers, and I am not so naive to think that all who claim to be really are.
To help contribute to the development of a more clear understanding of Christianity’s metanarrative, I wrote “Fidelis,” the first book of seven in my “Birth Pangs” series. The goal is to write an engaging story that people will enjoy (atheists, postmoderns, moderns, alike) and explore various themes common to humanity. Utilizing story, I mean to explore Story, and make the case that the Christian Worldview isn’t merely well-evidenced (for I think it is) but also deeply satisfying, as well. This is my first major undertaking in what is called ‘literary apologetics.’
I include in this category poetry, music, fiction… all of the intangibles which communicate truth to us in a way that we feel with our hearts and know to be real. Science is not the only way to know something, contrary to what the thread poster asserted. We know that this is not the case. Everyone knows that. Hollywood knows it, just as the entire entertainment industry knows it. It is my view that Christians have abandoned many of these venues, and that has contributed to the current crisis. It is my hope to encourage individuals in the Church and the Church as a whole to invest time, energy, and resources into ‘arguments’ that speak to our need for a satisfying Explanation.
The poster on my forum I’ve mentioned, though positively incoherent in his demands for scientific demonstration of that which is by definition outside the bounds of scientific exploration, is right to look for that which resonates in his being. It is not entirely his fault that he does not comprehend that Christianity will move him like no other world view will.
Posted by Anthony on October 18, 2007
I wrote the following for another blog but thought it would be appropriate here. It was inspired by the fact that I have a role playing game built around my book series, which you can find here.
——————————-
What is about fantasy role playing games that appeal to so many people? Never mind the games- what about the movies? The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Chronicles of Narnia, the Matrix… these and more appear to appeal to something deep inside of nearly every human being. Why?
There are some people that think that humans are just the result of a long chain of natural processes. Survival of the fittest, if you will. But why should survival of the fittest produce people who enjoy stories? Why do we not only enjoy stories, but enjoy telling them? Not even that! Why do we so badly wish that we were actually in the stories? There are some people who wish to reduce everything to natural selection, but isn’t fantasy, myth, and mystery something that flies right in the face of such an idea?
Are you nothing more than dirt? The question is not “Is it possible for dirt to find mystery in the world?†but rather “Why should dirt find mystery in the world?â€
I submit to you that we are not dirt. I submit to you that everyone who reads this knows only by looking at their own hearts and minds as they respond to deeply moving mythical and fantastical movies and stories that they are much more than dirt. However, if you, my dear reader, are like me, the same moment that you can tell that you are more than dirt (no matter what anyone else says), you know that some how the world is not big enough for us. Reality is a let down. We long for something more, hope for something more… fantasy role playing games help to feed this hunger. Even then, we know it is nothing more than a mere appetizer.
Is there any world view or belief system out there that predicts and explains these facts? Christianity does. Imagine this: the world is oppressed, and some don’t even know it, but still they feel it. An evil enemy is trying to subdue the world. The Superhero arrives and does battle with the enemy! but alas, the superhero is dealt a deathblow… he falls…. he dies… the enemy laughs, and gloats, and cheers, and looks forward to finally finishing off anyone else who stands in his way… But beyond amazing and beyond hope! A great curse is broken, a mystery of the universe unknown to the enemy is revealed! The superhero is alive! And the enemy… must flee… but his time of judgment will come… it will come…
Now, this is obviously the story of Jesus. He is God the superhero coming to a broken and oppressed world. His enemies assault him, his Enemy strikes him down. The wounded weep and the wicked ones rejoice… but suddenly its all turned upside down. Jesus is raised from the dead! He descends into the depths and in victory ascends. The enemy flees… for a little while. That is the story of Christianity, but is this not also the story in two of the stories listed above? In both the Chronicles of Narnia and in the Matrix the superhero is struck down but is raised again. Evil remains, but only for a little while… Even in the Lord of the Rings, Saruman is defeated but still remains after the Return of the King.
So, is Christianity just the ultimate pre-quel to Aslan and Neo? Is Christianity just another timeless story? It may seem that way, but that is not what Christianity claims. Christianity rests its power on the fact that the Fantasy has actually become a Fact! And why does the story so appeal to us? Because the story was built into us by God, so that we’d receive it when the story became his-story.
What other ‘religion’ looks at our love of myth, mystery, and fantasy, but does not merely explain it away? Everyone the world over loves myth, mystery, and fantasy, but only Christianity says, “Yes, that is to be expected, because we are made in the image of God, and God is a storyteller, and that makes us storylovers, and there was always in mind one grand plot- the same grand plot that we so love- and the story is the real story of our world? Only Christianity even talks about it. Only Christianity embraces it as an important part of what it means to be human. Other religions, and even some science, flatly ignores it. They have to ignore it… they have no explanation for it.
So, enjoy playing in the fantasy role playing games and bathing yourself in myth and mystery! But if I’m right, and Christianity is right, then there is more meaning to events surrounding you this very minute. If Jesus is God stepping right into the human story, we must not forget that we ourselves are part of that human story! That means each of us are characters thoughtfully included by the Author, and each of us have a part to play. It is not for us to decide how big of a part we play, it is only our duty to play it well and to the best of our ability.
